[[6.12.10] Wireguard "AllowedIPs" isnt accepted by the WebUI]

4 hours ago, Mainfrezzer said:

Anything above the basic "point Client to Server" or "point Client to Server Network" requires manual configuation.

Okay, and how can i do manual configuration, without the case, that the guide revert my changes, when hitting "apply" button?

[[6.12.10] Wireguard "AllowedIPs" isnt accepted by the WebUI]

1 hour ago, Mainfrezzer said:

For every client thats only supposed to see and talk to the server, remote access to server is right choice.

thats what i did... just with an addtion, that the 10.253.3.0/27 (which are .3.1 till .3.30 is) is also allowed.

 

1 hour ago, Mainfrezzer said:

For every client that supposed to talk to the server and vpn clients, youre looking at a hub and spoke setting.

that is what i choosed for the peer with with ip range from .3.2 till 3.30.

 

my "'report" shoulnd be about a specific or complext setup.

i is about the not applied changes, when i hit the "apply" button.

i am not able to setting up "complex" setups by my own.

[[6.12.10] Wireguard "AllowedIPs" isnt accepted by the WebUI]

okay, the case is:

 

10.253.3.31-10.253.3.100 should be connected to the server, but not see each or other clients on that VPN.

10.253.3.1-10.253.3.31 should be connected to the server and all other VPN clients.

 

so what should be the "right" preset for that case?

i think my choise is right, with the "manually" addition on the "AllowedIPs", or how to handel that?

 

btw, i manually added the "AllowedIPs" on the seeds, after i imported the config and it works like it should.

 

i dont know if i am right, but those "presets" are for the IP tables and WebUI, but it shouldn't remove manually added values. Especally when thoses addition are working.

[[6.12.10] Wireguard "AllowedIPs" isnt accepted by the WebUI]

it worked like it want, when i manually edited it at the client config.

 

the peer "kvm-isg" can only reach the server, but there are also peers that are allowed to comunicate with: 10.253.3.1 - 10.253.3.30

[[6.12.6] Parity Check (tuning) schedule won't do correction]

On 1/27/2024 at 12:28 PM, JorgeB said:

but LT is aware of the issue and it should be fixed soon.

Bug is still present on 6.12.9

 

[[6.12.6] Parity Check (tuning) schedule won't do correction]

Changed Status to Open

[[6.12.8] Docker Container won't create when emty hostpath is in template]

thank you @Squid.

so that thread can be closed?

[[6.12.8] Docker Container won't create when emty hostpath is in template]

7 minutes ago, Squid said:

Why would you want to have a container path that isn't mapped to a host path?

I didn't "want" it empty. It was like I load that template from the CA and I don't have any reasons using that path at the moment. I didn't recognize that before, because the container was builded with that empty path on later unraid version.

 

9 minutes ago, Squid said:

Docker silently failed on .6 as it wouldn't create any container path.  Now they're calling it an error instead of silently failing.

Okay thank you for explaining me that case. 

 

9 minutes ago, JonathanM said:

What happens if you properly fill out the export path?

The same, like I did (deleting that path): it will work. 

 

9 minutes ago, JonathanM said:

I don't think 6.12.6 would have accepted it either.

I has... Like squid said before.

 

 

I reported it, because I think I will not the last one who runs into that "problem"

Just wanna try to help. 

[[6.12.6] Parity Check (tuning) schedule won't do correction]

Changed Status to Solved

[[6.12.6] Parity Check (tuning) schedule won't do correction]

@JorgeB thanks for your response. i will change the status to solved and hope that will be fixed in a futur update.

[[6.12.6] Parity Check (tuning) schedule won't do correction]

Any news on this? Am i to stupid for a automated Parity-Check, or is this a Bug?

[[6.12.6] Parity Check (tuning) schedule won't do correction]

2 minutes ago, itimpi said:

That would be expected if you have uninstalled the plugin as mentioned earlier?   

 

yes, like i said here:

On 1/2/2024 at 11:04 AM, sonic6 said:

@bonienl @JorgeB

 

On 1/2/2024 at 10:12 AM, ChatNoir said:

Have you tried without the plugin to ensure that it is indeed an Unraid issue ?

i tried this again at 11:00 without the plugin:

 

[[6.12.6] Parity Check (tuning) schedule won't do correction]

6 minutes ago, itimpi said:

If you have the Dynamix File Manager plugin installed then you can navigate to the plugins folder on the flash drive  /boot/config/plugins/parity.check.tuning/ to get a file listing.

okay, there any files:

root@Unraid-1:~# ls -la /boot/config/plugins/parity.check.tuning/
/bin/ls: cannot access '/boot/config/plugins/parity.check.tuning/': No such file or directory

[[6.12.6] Parity Check (tuning) schedule won't do correction]

Any news on this? Problem is still present.

[[6.12.6] Parity Check (tuning) schedule won't do correction]

22 hours ago, itimpi said:

It might be useful if a listing of the files that are there could be given as that could provide a clue as to what that might be.   In addition the contents of any "progress" type files that are there.

what is the recommendes way to do this?

[[6.12.6] Parity Check (tuning) schedule won't do correction]

5 hours ago, itimpi said:

The Parity Check Tuning plugin would not have initiated the check.

I said the same. 

 

4 hours ago, itimpi said:

While I think of it we normally recommended that scheduled parity checks are set to be non-correcting.

Fine, but when I choose a correction for m schedule, than it should do that.

 

On my last test from 11:00 the parity check tuning plugin wasn't installed. 

[[6.12.6] Parity Check (tuning) schedule won't do correction]

@bonienl @JorgeB

 

50 minutes ago, ChatNoir said:

Have you tried without the plugin to ensure that it is indeed an Unraid issue ?

i tried this again at 11:00 without the plugin:

 

 

Jan  2 11:00:02 Unraid-1 kernel: mdcmd (69): check NOCORRECT
Jan  2 11:00:02 Unraid-1 kernel: 
Jan  2 11:00:02 Unraid-1 kernel: md: recovery thread: check P ...

 

Diagnostic is attached.

 

unraid-1-diagnostics-20240102-1104.zip

[[6.12.6] Parity Check (tuning) schedule won't do correction]

6 minutes ago, ChatNoir said:

Parity check tuning is a third party plugin, not part of base Unraid.

i know, but the parity check was triggert by the default unraid parity check schedule and this :

Jan  2 00:00:07 Unraid-1 kernel: mdcmd (62): check NOCORRECT
Jan  2 00:00:07 Unraid-1 kernel: 
Jan  2 00:00:07 Unraid-1 kernel: md: recovery thread: check P ...

isn't a part of parity-check tuning

 

6 minutes ago, ChatNoir said:

Have you tried without the plugin to ensure that it is indeed an Unraid issue ?

no, not yet.

[6.12.0-rc4 "macvlan call traces found", but not on <=6.11.x]

for all, who are looking for a fix, here it is: 

 

[Unraid OS version 6.12.4-rc18 available]

1 hour ago, Mainfrezzer said:

So far its been looking very good. 👍

The Webterminal does work again on mobile (android 13, chrome) but clicking the syslog shortcut still breaks everything.
And while im at the syslog, this is certainly new in .12.4 



this keeps on going for a while. seems to have started after the 24h dc.

 

i think this is because of the changing ipv6 prefix. fe80 prefixes changes in germany after DC's
so this isn't usable for a static route?

@bonienl can you take a look into that?

[Unraid OS version 6.12.4-rc18 available]

6 minutes ago, bonienl said:

How many containers do you have?

41 Containers are running.
I did't change the count on containers in the last weeks.

[Unraid OS version 6.12.4-rc18 available]

The Docker Area in Dashboard is very slow with 6.12.4RC18 . Doesn't matter if you using the folderview plugin or not. @alturismo got the same.

 

[Unraid OS version 6.12.4-rc18 available]

7 minutes ago, bonienl said:

@sonic6

 

I like to doublecheck.

 

Can you post the result of (mask your public IPv6 address as needed)

 

ip -6 addr show eth0

 

 

[Unraid OS version 6.12.4-rc18 available]

1 hour ago, snowy00 said:

I Checked my router after the update an currently I have to devices with the same IP address that assigned to the Unraid Server,

 

Are the containers still working in bridge mode?

 

 

 

It seems Unraid eth0 interface has to MAC addresses --> I use a static IP for may Unraid Server. 

 

Ist that the Problem?

 

this is normal and was the same with the old method.

go into your unraid web terminal and type "ip address".
then look for search for MAC-Adresses which are same like your router list with your unraid-server ip addresses

should be look like this:

[Unraid OS version 6.12.4-rc18 available]

i am not sure, but i think the routing tablet isn't correct for vhost?

 

fd00:: is my ULA which is needed for peristant hostname resolving.

2003:c0:xxxx:xxxx:: is the prefix from my provider, which is changing from time to time. so i can't use that addresses in my local DNS for local hostname resolving.